Skip to content
Grand Jury Hub

Finding F3

Finding F3

The limited communication and coordination between Mono County Behavioral Health and MLPD may result in the improper handling of arrestees leading to increased risks to the officers and public.

Jury report: Mammoth Lakes Police Department Detainment and Arrest Processes · PDF page 5

Permanent link

Official responses

Mono County Sheriff

Disagrees and explains several possible interpretations, distinguishing criminal arrests from health-related temporary detentions and citing HIPAA restrictions.

Read official response · PDF page 5

The response explains its interpretations and objections but does not fully engage the finding’s broader concern about non-clinical coordination and officer/public risk.

This review evaluates the response document. Implementation claims have not been independently verified.

Mono County Behavioral Health Director

Partly agrees and partly disagrees, distinguishes Behavioral Health’s assessment role from armed law enforcement, and describes referral procedures under the Mobile Crisis Response MOU.

Read official response · PDF page 9

Identifies both the accepted privacy concern and the disputed inference about mishandling; the described agreement is a checkable basis, not independently verified performance.

This review evaluates the response document. Implementation claims have not been independently verified.

Mono County Board of Supervisors

Partly agrees and partly disagrees, distinguishes Behavioral Health’s assessment role from armed law enforcement, and describes referral procedures under the Mobile Crisis Response MOU.

Read official response · PDF page 24

Identifies both the accepted privacy concern and the disputed inference about mishandling; the described agreement is a checkable basis, not independently verified performance.

This review evaluates the response document. Implementation claims have not been independently verified.

Mammoth Hospital

Says the hospital has no response to this finding at this time.

Read official response · PDF page 27

The explicit decision not to respond contains no agreement, disagreement, or finding-specific explanation; the source and mapping are clear, so this is scored rather than marked unscorable.

This review evaluates the response document. Implementation claims have not been independently verified.

Back to all findingsExplore this cycle’s discussion questions